> Let me preface this by saying that I don't fault anyone for their
> opinions. They are their opinions and as such deserve respect as such.
> When speaking of the below scenario I can see (especially considering
> the slow pace of mySQL dev in the past [which is no longer the case])
> why someone may have thought along these lines.
You mean that the 17 months that 4.0 spent in Beta is going to be
substantially shorter for 5.0? I don't suppose that is an
official claim of MySQL AB?
> I will post part of my response to this at the end of this message, but
> my question for the community is this, how many of us here use mySQL?
Not if I can help it, but unfortunately I am sometimes forced to
use it.
> How many passed
> up using mySQL because of similar perceptions as those state above?
I make my decisions based on facts, not perceptions.
> "MySQL supports foreign keys when the table is of the InnoDB type (MySQL
> supports several different engines). Support for this has been around
> since at least 4.0, though I think it may even go back as far as 3.23.
4.0.12 was the first stable release with what MySQL calls foreign
keys.
> The Alpha build of 5.0 was released this last month. E-week reported in
> testing that it was incredibly stable and that the new addition of
> stored procedure support was a major plus.
Stored procedures are server wide instead of database wide, so
they are unusable in a hosted environment with a shared database
server.
> As I understand it views are to be supported possibly as early as 5.1."
5.0 alpha was released last month. We are about 28 months past
the release of 4.0 alpha, and there isn't a 4.1 stable yet. Do
your own math, but even if they make it in 5.1 I don't think I
would call that 'early'.
Jochem
--
I don't get it
immigrants don't work
and steal our jobs
- Loesje
[Todays Threads] [This Message] [Subscription] [Fast Unsubscribe] [User Settings]
